* I told subscribers about this today. You’ll have to subscribe to get all the deets, however. There’s quite a lot left out of this report…
A suburban state senator isn’t backing down from efforts to oust the beleaguered Illinois GOP chair, who supports gay marriage, at Saturday’s state central committee meeting in Tinley Park.
Dairy magnate Jim Oberweis, of Sugar Grove, told the Daily Herald Friday that he believes the state central committee will soon begin interviewing potential candidates to replace GOP Chair Pat Brady of St. Charles, though he did not indicate whether there were enough votes to force the chairman’s ouster in the coming weeks. […]
Oberweis reacted strongly on Friday against speculation that an agreement crafted by Brady supporters could be reached and that Brady might exit gracefully and be replaced by state Sen. Matt Murphy, of Palatine.
“It’s going to be determined by the state central committee and not by anybody who thinks suddenly they’ve got a great idea,” Oberweis said.
I talked to Oberweis yesterday and again today. He wants you to know, in no uncertain terms, that he’s not opposed to Republicans supporting gay marriage. He says he just adamantly believes that the state GOP chairman should adhere publicly to the party platform.
* I was also able to confirm yesterday that it was indeed Sen. Oberweis who recently commented on my blog…
Jim Oberweis - Thursday, Apr 4, 13 @ 10:17 pm:
I have tried to make this clear to every reporter I have spoken to: I believe it is OK for any Republican, including elected officials, to have some differences with the party platform. However, if you are the “CEO” of the state party, it is not OK to lobby against the state party platform. If the State Party Chairman feels so strongly in opposition to the party platform, then he/she should resign from the position as chairman since it will be very difficult for him/her to then lead a unified party. I’m not happy that Mark Kirk or Jason Barickman took a position that differs from our party but that does not mean that they are not good Republicans.
* Oberweis also told me that his political director was upset because I had deleted one of his comments here. I said I didn’t remember deleting the comment, but I delete a lot of them and that maybe it was just held up by my automatic moderation system. So, I went back and looked today and found it. It had, indeed, been held and I didn’t notice, probably because it was posted in the evening and I was out and about by then. Anyway, here it is…
Ben Marcum - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 8:44 pm: |Edit
Rich,
I must take issue with your characterization of Jim Oberweis backtracking or recalibrating his message on the Pat Brady issue. Nothing could be further from the truth. Since the story about Pat Brady lobbying legislators first broke, Jim’s message has been the same. From day one Senator Oberweis has stated in nearly every interview that this indeed, has NOTHING to do with gay marriage. Instead, it is and always has been an issue of corporate governance. You’ve been around long enough to know that most of these reporters have the story written before they even speak with him. I am fully aware of the narrative that Jim is some sort of ultra right wing bigot who hates illegal immigrants and gays. I’ve worked closely with the man for a decade and I assure you it is total myth. I fail to see a link of recalibration or retooling drawn from the Kane County Chronicle quote. Jim has always told reporters that if it had been another issue contrary to the Republican platform his response would have been the same. It could have been Pat Brady supporting Obamacare or Quinn’s tax increase. You later go on to say, “A month after saying it was all about gay marriage, Oberweis told Chicago Public Radio “It has nothing to do with gay marriage.” The Chicago Public Radio quote is COMPLETELY consistent with what he has said from the beginning. I’ve heard him give the interviews. It just is not the case!! With the current legislature being the most liberal in my lifetime, I don’t see how Jim is losing the argument when Madigan still can’t find the votes to pass it. It appears to me like Jim is winning the argument.
Respectfully,
Ben Marcum
Political Director
Friends of Jim Oberweis
The Illinois Department of Human Services is struggling to provide services as some workers face caseloads of more than a thousand people.
Michelle Saddler, the agency’s director, said that the department is understaffed. “Many of you have probably heard DHS is behind or DHS has a backlog,” she told a House human services budget committee today. “We at DHS overall need more realistic staffing.” The department is asking for $3.6 billion for fiscal year 2014, the same amount proposed under Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget. DHS is expected to spend more than $3.2 billion this fiscal year. The department was cut by almost $150 million under the current fiscal year’s budget.
Linda Saterfield, director of the division of family and community services at DHS, said some of her caseworkers have caseloads as big as 2,600. “If you calculate that out, that leaves that worker less than 45 minutes over the course of a year to serve that family.” The average caseload in the division, which administers such core safety net programs as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, averages more than 900 cases per worker. That compares with the year 2000, when the average was just under 250 cases per worker. Saterfield said that one in four residents are served through one of the division’s programs. “Our caseload has grown dramatically, but our staffing levels have reduced so much that we are unable to adequately meet the needs for services,” she said.
Kevin Casey, director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities at DHS, said there are about 11,000 people with developmental disabilities waiting for services in Illinois. He said the wait time can be up to four years. “It really is a struggle to understand how they get from one day to another at times,” Casey told the committee. He said the department does have a plan to reduce the number of people on the wait list over the next few years. Casey told committee members that he would later calculate what it would cost to address the wait list immediately. “It’s a choker of a number. It would take a good deal of money to serve everyone on that waiting list.”
Theodora Binion, acting director of the Division of Mental Health at DHS, said that more than 80 percent of people in need of mental health services are not receiving them. “Eighty percent of the people who need mental health services aren’t getting them? Something fundamentally is wrong with that system,” said Rep. David Leitch, who serves on the committee. Leitch said that he thinks lawmakers should prioritize mental health funding over other requests the department might have. “To overlook this, to me, is quite a crisis. I think we should as a committee take a very hard look [at it] before we add a lot of new employees at DHS and do some of the other things.” Binion said steps are being taken to serve more people through managed care programs. “I think that there are plans afoot to increase the capacity.”
Social service advocates say agencies providing in-home care for seniors could be at risk if additional state money is not set aside to pay them.
The Illinois Department of Aging notified service providers in a letter March 7 that it would soon run out of money to fund the Community Care Program for the current fiscal year, which ends on June 30. Providers say that $173 million is needed to properly fund service through the end of Fiscal Year 2013. Kimberly Parker, the Department of Aging’s spokeswoman, said in an email it was “common knowledge” the legislature did not give the agency enough money to continue to pay providers through the entire fiscal year and that administrators are hopeful additional money could be found. She said that so far, providers have continued to administer services, but without more funding, payment would likely be delayed until the start of next fiscal year.
The program serves mainly lower-income seniors who apply for assistance through the state for home-based long-term care assistance, with everyday needs ranging from preparing meals and running errands to dressing and bathing, according to the agency’s website. The program helps to care for an estimated 80,000 senior citizens in the state. Aside from at-home providers, it also helps to pay for background checks for at-home caregivers, adult day centers that watch elderly clients during the day and a program designed to preventing elderly spouses from being burdened by their spouses in-home care and falling into poverty. To qualify, Illinois residents must be at least 60 years old, the state must determine that they need long-term care and they must have less than $17,500 in assets aside from their home, car and furniture.
* Meanwhile, the mother of a Murray Developmental Center resident confronted the governor this week, and WUIS’ Amanda Vinicky jumped in…
WINKELER: “It is not safe, one size does not fit all…”
QUINN: “Well I understand that.”
Winkeler’s son, Mark, is 28-years-old…
WINKELER: “He functions like a nine-month old, has an IQ of twelve, needs total round the clock care, diaper changing, feeding, clothing.”
Like the kind care she says he gets at Murray.
Winkler says Quinn might realize that if he ever saw it firsthand.
VINICKY: “Governor, actually have you visited Murray Center, or Jacksonville Developmental Center?”
QUINN: “I made a decision based on what I think was right for the people of Illinois, it’s not an easy decision but a necessary one.”
VINICKY: “But did you visit either of them ever?”
QUINN: “No. I have not. I’ve seen plenty of information about it.”
*** UPDATE *** From the governor’s office…
The one-size-fits-all approach is exactly what we are moving away from. Before Governor Quinn took office, Illinois institutionalized more people than any other state. Now we are rebalancing the way the state provides services for people with developmental disabilities and mental health challenges, increasing community care so that families have more choices and people have a higher quality of life.
Whether it be an institution (once Murray is closed, there will be six institutions left Illinois); community care (which is proven to provide a higher quality of life, which is why we have increased community care and are building more capacity every day); or private intermediate care facilities (of which there are 298 across Illinois) — this is the opposite of a one-size-fits-all approach.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* Related…
* The state of mental health funding in Illinois is ill.
I am fully aware how difficult it will be to keep it clean, but you must keep it clean. And write your posts in English as well. I don’t wanna be using Google Translate all darned day to make sure you’re following directions.
* I didn’t get into this part of Rep. Tom Morrison’s argument today against gay marriage…
If one male and one female is discriminatory, then isn’t limitation of marriage to just two people discriminatory, too? There are men who would like to marry two or more consenting females. Would you define their relationship as marriage, too?
The post was way too long as it was, so I just skipped over that. But some folks are debating it in comments, including the usual social conservative stance that polygamy must be approved if gay marriage is allowed. The commenter “47th Ward” wrote a highly cogent counter-argument…
Plural marriages would require a complete rewrite of the tax code to determine how and who can file as married filing jointly. Divorce laws would need to be amended, including custody and property rights. What if I want to divorce one of my wives, but my other wives don’t want to divorce the other?
The civil, legal understanding of marriage is a two-party, mutually agreed contract. To argue for polygamy you are truly trying to redefine marriage.
Providing for same sex civil marriage brings none of the extra legal issues to the table. The polygamy argument is ignorant and tiresome.
Discuss. And, please, try to be intellectually honest with the rest of us. Arguing in favor of something you actually oppose in order to score some cheap points in a different argument is not cool or welcome.
* The News-Gazette interviewed possible Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner…
Rauner also said he was prepared to use the power of the governorship to take on “special interests.”
“We are a state that has been taken over completely by special-interest groups that make their money from government. Unfortunately for us, they’ve taken over a big chunk of the Republican Party too,” he said. “We don’t like to talk about it, but it’s true. And they own the Democratic Party. The folks who make their money from the government — AFSCME and SEIU and the teachers’ unions and trial lawyers, you look at their financial muscle, who they’ve given donations to. They’ve got our taxpayers by the throats and they’re squeezing. They’ve got our schoolchildren by the throats and they’re squeezing them.”
He declined to say specifically how he would take on interest groups.
Um, hmm. Wouldn’t “special-interest groups that make their money from government” also include the companies which have made millions of dollars from investing government pension funds? And wouldn’t that list include Rauner’s former company?
“The governorship in Illinois is a very powerful governorship,” he said. “You can do things with executive order here that many states can’t do. You have an amendatory veto, line-item veto, you’ve got the ability to appoint to key positions that the Legislature wants to have influence in. If you’re a creative negotiator and you’ve got a steel backbone and are willing to play hardball, you can get a lot of stuff done. We’ll be stretching the power of the office. I’ll be stretching the envelope aggressively.”
Executive orders are basically limited to reorganizing state agencies. Lots of governors have done that, and the reorgs have failed more often than not.
And I think it’ll be extremely important for political reporters to get him to say how he will be “stretching the envelope aggressively” if he’s elected governor. If Rauner intends to do unprecedented things with the office, then we definitely ought to know what he has in mind. And if he won’t say, well, that’s also a great attack ad. Fear of the unknown is the worst.
“I don’t think Bill ran a particularly good campaign. Let’s start with that. I think he ran a pretty lousy campaign and he spent virtually no time in metro Chicago,” he said. “You’re not going to win if you don’t show your face. Nobody will outwork me in this campaign.”
* Speaking of Sen. Brady, the likely 2014 candidate sent a confidential letter to his supporters a few weeks ago. In that letter, he defends his losing 2010 race. Click the pic for a larger view…
The full letter is here. There are some poll results and other stuff that you might wanna discuss below.
* And while you’re at it, take a gander at this letter Sen. Brady sent to his colleagues yesterday. Notice the misspelling of Sen. Durbin’s name. It’s also misspelled as “Durban” on the press release, along with numerous other typos. Oops.
* WBEZ has an excellent story about how Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s demand that state legislators increase mandatory minimum sentences is not based on actual research. Emanuel, his police chief and others have pointed to New York City’s great success with reducing crime and claim that harsher mandatory minimums are a big reason for that success…
The situation in New York — that’s one of the main “arguments” Emanuel and Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy have repeatedly made over the past few months as they’ve pushed their agenda on gun legislation..
“And just look at New York,” said McCarthy at a press conference this week. “It couldn’t be a clearer example of how to do this. The fact is, where these conditions exist, it’s working. I mean, what research do we need?”
[Frank Zimring is] a professor of law at the University of California Berkeley and author of the book “The City That Became Safe: New York’s Lessons for Urban Crime and its Control.”
“The mandatory minimum punishments, is, if you study the New York experience, beside the point,” said Zimring.
Zimring studied 19 years of data tracking crime in New York. He says in 1990 the city had 2,250 murders. In 2012, it had 419. That’s an astonishing 80 percent drop in murder.
It’s that success that’s being used to justify the mandatory minimum sentences being proposed by Emanuel and McCarthy, but mandatory minimums weren’t signed into law in New York until late 2006.
“That’s after 90 percent of the crime reduction!” said Zimring. “I think that what’s going on is that the superintendent and the mayor in Chicago are under a ‘do something fast political pressure,’ and in my experience, at least, that’s never been good for penal codes.”
On Thursday, Phelps said he thinks both sides are as divided as they were at the beginning of the spring session, despite ongoing negotiations over several components of his bill, such as defining where guns couldn’t be carried and whether home-rule units could have local control.
“I don’t know if there’s going to be a compromise, to be honest,” Phelps said. “I just think we’re too far apart.”
Pearson said a mandate to make people report lost or stolen guns “actually makes the victim the defendant” and “actually helps the criminal element.”
Pearson said everything gun control advocates want to do “puts a burden on the law-abiding gun owner and doesn’t do anything to punish the criminal.”
The gun control advocates’ real goal is “to nullify the Second Amendment, to stigmatize gun owners and to culturally isolate them so lawful firearm owners look like some kind of weird fringe group, when that’s not true. Actually, they (the gun control advocates) are the weird fringe group,” Pearson said.
I don’t quite see how reporting lost or stolen guns helps criminals. But I do believe that he’s at least partly right on some things. Focusing on generally law-abiding people when crafting gun control measures is often counter-productive. You end up with people prosecuted for harmless stuff. Focus on the violent criminals. Mayor Emanuel’s proposal to up their sentences may not be based on science, but at least it puts the focus where it belongs.
However, if yesterday’s polling is anywhere near accurate, then the gun control groups are solidly within the mainstream. They aren’t fringe by any means.
While gun regulation supporters rallied outside, House lawmakers inside the Statehouse voted in favor of a measure that would create a mental health first aid program in which certified trainers could teach members of the public how to recognize and help someone who could be dealing with a mental health disorder or addiction.
Backed by lawmakers who referenced the mental health condition of the shooter in Newtown, the bill passed 105-8. It now moves to the Senate.
Sponsoring Rep. Esther Golar, D-Chicago, told lawmakers to spread the word of this proposal through “town hall meetings and in your newsletters” because people need information about mental health issues in society.
* From NAACP Illinois State Conference President George P. Mitchell…
“The NAACP was founded 104 years ago in response to the continuing horrific practice of lynching and the 1908 race riot in Springfield.
While the nature of the struggle may change, our bedrock commitment to civil rights and freedom never will and that includes civil marriage equality. The fight for freedom and equality encompasses all mankind.
We live in a democracy. In our democracy we have the benefit of a Constitution which defines the equal rights which we all share and to which we as a nation aspire. The Fourteenth Amendment to that Constitution says, in part, that no state “shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” and that becomes a significantly relevant issue.
Just 50 years ago, many states would not recognize a marriage between people of different races. Today, we see marriage equality as a civil rights issue and an extension of that fight. Marriage equality is just that – the right to be treated equally in the eyes of the government. What better evidence than the Fourteenth Amendment.
People of good conscience can disagree on this issue. We deeply respect differences of opinion and conscience on the religious definition of marriage, and we strongly affirm the religious freedoms and ceremonial practices of all as protected by the First Amendment.
But, the NAACP will always stand for full equality under the law.”
According to its website, the state conference has no officers from Chicago. That’s a problem because much of the pushback on gay marriage is coming from Chicago ministers.
There was a time at the Illinois Statehouse when using African-American ministers as political props was all the rage.
ComEd touted support from black preachers to pass a bill to raise its rates. AT&T did the same when it passed a major piece of legislation. Before the national real estate and banking crash, the mortgage industry fought a bill to crack down on excessively lenient home loans by putting black ministers up front.
And though the ministers were obviously just doing a bit of payroll shilling, their state legislators took them quite seriously.
ComEd and AT&T won their fights.
The mortgage industry lost, but only because House Speaker Michael Madigan called in every favor he could think of to pass his bill. But then Gov. Rod Blagojevich used his veto powers to basically gut the measure, so Madigan eventually lost and the industry won.
For whatever reason, the big corporations have mostly stopped recruiting African-American ministers to front their causes.
But there’s a new group called the African-American Clergy Coalition that is trying to make some waves in Springfield, and they’re doing a pretty good job.
The group claims on its website that it exists to provide resolutions to problems “affecting the lives of African-American and other oppressed people.”
Right now, though, the only issue the group is tackling is gay marriage. The ministers are against it. Solidly against it, despite the thick irony of declaring support for the oppressed while fighting to deny civil marriage rights to others.
The pastors are doing a very good job so far of intimidating black legislators into backing away from their previous support. Their push has all but halted the momentum of gay marriage backers, who had high hopes when the state Senate approved the bill in February.
Along the way, some of those ministers have picked up a few bucks. For example, Bishop Larry Trotter of the New Century Fellowship International was paid $1,000 out of the group’s new political action committee for “clergy consulting.” Bishop Lance Davis of the New Zion Christian Fellowship Covenant Church was also paid $1,000 for “clergy consulting.”
So far, the group has reported raising $72,000, all of it from the National Organization for Marriage, which was heavily involved in passing California’s statewide proposition that declared marriage to be solely between a man and a woman. NOM is run by white folks who have recently made outreach to the black community a top priority. Polls have consistently shown that African-Americans are not nearly as supportive of gay rights and gay marriage as whites.
Of that significant NOM cash pile, the African-American Clergy Coalition has so far reported spending just $11,250 to actually air radio ads blasting gay marriage.
They don’t really need the ads. For decades, African-American churches have been at the center of black political life. Candidates, black and white, flock to the churches during election time, seeking a few kind words of praise. What the pastors say generally goes.
This is America and church pastors have the absolute right to weigh in on the issues of the day. The prospect of losing their religious tax exemptions is extremely remote because the IRS almost always gives churches the benefit of the doubt.
But the upcoming gay marriage vote here in Illinois is taking place on a national stage. The pastors need to be very careful to make sure they dot all their “i’s” and cross all their “t’s” because a very bright light may be shone in their direction.
Um, this issue is about marriage between two consenting adults, not pedophilia.
Let’s try to make this clear. To “refuse” an adult the right to marry a nine year old wouldn’t be “discrimination.” It would be preventing statutory rape. It’s defined as statutory rape because a nine year old girl cannot give such “consent” to an adult.
* I talked with Rep. Morrison this morning. He clearly regretted sending the e-mail, which he said he did in haste, adding “I don’t hate anybody,” and saying he wanted to have a “healthy debate” on the issue. He also insisted that he didn’t ever mean to imply that proponents are “advocating for statutory rape.”
Still, some things are just best left unsaid. And when given an opportunity to back down, he wouldn’t.
“If you look at my follow up e-mail, I flesh it out.” Morrison then referenced an article about a nine-year old Saudi girl forced into marriage that he’d read a while ago. “Two years ago we were told, we don’t want marriage, we want legal protections, and furthermore there’s going to be no impact on religious institutions… And less than a year later, Catholic Charities is out of the adoption business, and in the next General Assembly we see SB 10. I think it’s a fair question to ask ‘What is the next thing?… I think that’s the kind of dialogue I want to have with my constituents.”
“Maybe this is a little provocative,” he said, but also claimed that he was being unfairly singled out. “I think the proponents of the bill have to keep the interest level up. That’s why this group sent this e-mail to the media outlets.”
“I apologized to her,” the legislator said. “I invited her to a meeting… This is an attempt to make me look like a bad guy. It’s an effort to paint me in the worst possible light. It’s an attempt to assassinate my character.”
* Rep. Morrison also forwarded me a long e-mail he sent his constituent in response…
Dear [Redacted],
I got an email and phone call tonight from Natasha Korecki at the Chicago Sun-Times. She told me that you were upset by the last email I sent you regarding SB10.
I get hundreds if not thousands of emails everyday, and I do my best to read and personally respond to as many as I can. Sometimes in my haste to deliver, words or thoughts do not translate well.
As you’re well aware, we do disagree on this issue and likely will continue to disagree. That’s OK. I have my strongly felt reasons, and you have yours.
To be clear, however: I do not equate same sex marriage with statutory rape.
The point I was trying to make was this: the state already has certain restrictions on what marriage is. The law itself makes distinctions on who can and cannot marry. For example, one cannot be married to more than one person at the same time. You are not advocating for polyamory (I don’t think), but there are those in Illinois who do. Just google Polyamory Chicago, and see for yourself. They argue that the state is discriminating against their sexual orientation, love, desire to commit, freedom, equality, etc.
The state also defines the age at which individuals may marry. There are groups today that believe young girls ought to be able to marry. Check out the following: (http://jonathanturley.org/2010/02/26/marriage “Saudi Cleric Defends Marriage of Nine-Year-Old Girls and Blasts Human Rights Treaties as the Work of Atheists and Fornicators”). Yes, I find that shocking, too! Saudi Arabia is not Illinois obviously, but would this Saudi Cleric consider IL’s law on marriage to be discriminatory? Probably. I think it’s a fair question to ask. By whose standards do we make our laws? I learned to drive a car at age 10. Was the state prejudicial against me in not allowing me to get a license and drive until I was 16? Why not 15? Why not 12? Why not 10?
So how do we as a society deal with differences of opinion and beliefs on important and emotional issues?
We have a democratic process here. The people’s elected representatives are deciding whether or not our state’s marriage law should be re-defined. Our society is engaged in a healthy debate about that now. You and I can continue to engage in that now, if you wish, either via email, phone call, or in person. In fact, I will be meeting with a Palatine man who is in a same sex civil union later this summer (assuming SB10 still hasn’t been decided by then). You and I could also meet individually or as a group to discuss this.
Changing a law like this is not a light matter. Same sex relationships have been around for millenia, obviously, but codifying marriage as a relationship without regard to gender is a shift of enormous proportions. Interracial marriages have been in existence for millenia, too. Though they were temporarily (in the scope of human history) outlawed in certain jurisdictions, the unions were still of man and woman. That’s why I don’t believe it’s appropriate to say SB10 is analogous with interracial marriage laws, by the way.
Just two years ago, in a lame duck session, the legislature passed a civil unions law. You may believe that it was late in coming, or inadequate, or still discriminatory to same sex couples; you and I haven’t discussed those details so I don’t know. During the debate two years ago, however, the sponsors of the civil unions bill stated that marriage was not their end goal. They also stated that religious individuals and organizations would not be affected if the civil unions law was enacted. We discovered in short order that neither was the case. Same sex marriage is under discussion now, and two large religious-based adoption agencies have had their state contracts cancelled due to religious beliefs. That’s why opponents have real concerns about SB10.
[Redacted name], I don’t seek to intentionally offend or be condescending to anyone, and if I was to you it was unintentional, and I genuinely apologize. If this ever happens again, please do not hesitate to contact my staff or me personally, and I will do my best to respond in a timely manner.
The marijuana bill the Illinois legislature is considering does away with the Food and Drug Administration process, and the legislature assumes the role of the FDA.
The FDA has concluded that marijuana has a high potential for abuse, has no accepted medical use and lacks an acceptable level of safety even under medical supervision. The FDA has approved Marinol, which is not smoked, but is marijuana in pill form. […]
This is about whether Illinois citizens want the legislature to decide on how to approve and dispense medicine instead of the FDA. The medical marijuana lobby has put together myths and money that will not make for a safe or healthier Illinois. The proposal endangers our youth, our highways and our workplaces and increases costs for employers and taxpayers. It is bad medicine.
Peter Bensinger is former administrator of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and former director of the Illinois Department of Corrections. Andrea Barthwell is former deputy director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
Two of the former Drug Enforcement Agency officials who came out this week urging the federal government to nullify new state pot laws in Washington and Colorado are facing criticism for simultaneously running a company that may profit from keeping marijuana illegal.
Robert L. DuPont, who was White House drug czar under Presidents Nixon and Ford, and Peter Bensinger, who was administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration in the 1970s, today run Bensinger, DuPont & Associates, a company that specializes in workplace drug testing, among other employee programs. Both men signed an open (along with eight other former DEA officials) addressed to Senate Judiciary Committee members this week criticizing the Obama administration for failing to quickly address the new states laws legalizing pot, which are inconsistent with federal law.
* The other co-author, Andrea Barthwell, at one time worked for GW Pharmaceuticals, a company that is marketing Sativex, which is a liquid made from marijuana plants…
GW Pharmaceuticals also announced this week that it had hired former White House Drug Czar Deputy Director Andrea Barthwell in an advisory capacity. As Deputy Director, Barthwell lobbied against legislative efforts to legalize the medical use of whole smoked cannabis by qualified patients. “Having this product (Sativex) available will certainly slow down the dash to make the crude plant material available to patients across the country,” Barthwell told the Los Angeles Times Wednesday.
The pharmaceutical company doesn’t want people smoking weed, they want to provide weed in liquid form and make lots and lots of money.
Early in Sativex’s development, GW hired Dr. Andrea Barthwell as a consultant to sing the drug’s praises, although she’s no longer in the employ of GM. Barthwell was a deputy drug czar under George W. Bush and is the former president of the American Society for Addiction Medicine (ASAM). In a recent ASAM press release, Barthwell denounced medical marijuana but — significantly — only because it was unregulated by the federal government. […]
The likes of Barthwell and Burr have drawn the ire of supporters for the reform of marijuana laws who believe that they represent the pharmaceutical industry’s goal for medical marijuana: demonize it, prosecute it, shut it down, then grab the market.
So, yeah, to answer the headline, I’m pretty sure the SJ-R got played.
* And I wonder if the Illinois Family Institute knew what was really going on when they scheduled Barthwell, Bensinger and Bensinger’s partner Robert L. DuPont to speak at an April 15th legislative conference…
Truth and Consequences of Marijuana as Medicine
A fact-checked, research-based discussion about marijuana and Illinois
Our speakers will sort fact from fiction about how marijuana impacts health and safety, Illinois youth, drugged driving and the workplace. They will explain what to expect if a medical marijuana law is enacted in Illinois, and how it will dramatically increase use and dependency. Join us to learn the facts.
This FREE conference on marijuana is for elected officials, educators, faith organizations, drug prevention and treatment providers, business leaders, and local governments. A complimentary lunch will be provided.
* 1:56 pm - The Illinois Supreme Court has agreed to hear a direct appeal of Sangamon County Judge Stephen Nardulli’s ruling that free health insurance is not a pension benefit and is therefore not protected by the state’s Constitution. The plaintiffs and the state both asked for the direct appeal. You can read the order by clicking here.
* Meanwhile, the House just voted to abolish the lt. governor’s office. From a press release…
State Representative David McSweeney (R-Barrington Hills) passed House Joint Resolution by Constitutional Amendment (HJRCA 18) as chief sponsor, a measure that would eliminate the job of Lieutenant Governor and be placed on the 2014 ballot for voters to approve. McSweeney garnered bipartisan support by citing that the measure will save the State money and eliminate redundancies.
HJRCA 18 passed the Illinois House today by a vote of 81-30. […]
The bill will have a positive fiscal impact on the state’s budget as it would eliminate the salary and operating costs of the Office of the Lt. Governor. For fiscal year 2013, the Lieutenant Governor’s salary was $135,900 and total office appropriations were approximately $2 million. […]
Under the legislation, the Attorney General would be next in line to assume the duties of Governor if necessary. The legislation would be effective for the term beginning in 2019.
Arizona, Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming all do not have the office of Lt. Governor.
The trick here is getting the Senate to act. Usually, these things die in the other chamber.
*** UPDATE *** Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon’s office says she’s neutral on the measure, but opposed to the idea. The full statement…
We’re neutral on the current proposal, as we support the opportunity for the public to provide input in their government through referenda. That said, we are opposed to the idea of abolishing the Lt. Governor’s Office, which is important for a number of reasons.
A total of 45 states have a Lt. Governor to succeed the Governor in cases of emergency, as has happened in Illinois five times, most recently with Governor Quinn.
The Lt. Governor is the only administration officer the Governor cannot fire and can be counted on to serve as an independent advisor.
In these tough economic times, Lt. Governor Simon has made it her mission to do more with less for the taxpayers of Illinois. She has voluntarily cut her budget by more than 12 percent the past two years and gives back a portion of her salary each year.
Simon is working hard to improve the quality of life for Illinois residents as the state’s point person on education reform, an advocate for victims of domestic violence and our military families, and she is leading the effort to preserve our rivers.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* Roundup…
* Defendant who cooperated in Blagojevich investigation agrees to plea deal: One of the last loose ends in Operation Board Games — the federal probe that led to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s incarceration — was tied up Wednesday when crooked construction boss Jacob Kiferbaum agreed to a final plea deal.
* One of the items not covered by the major media today regarding yesterday’s Senate Executive Committee hearing was a suggestion by Illinois Gaming Board Chairman Aaron Jaffe that agencies like CMS ought to be outright eliminated because of the time it takes to hire new employees. It takes at least six months, sometimes much more to hire people, Jaffe said.
Some Senators then offered to delete state laws governing patronage and civil service hiring for the Gaming Board to help things along, saying the Gaming Board would likely not make bad hiring decisions. Chairman Jaffe and his staff seemed to like the idea, even though the laws were put on the books after decades of state hiring corruption. Jaffe said that in some cases the board had tried to hire experts, but by the time they were given approval the potential employees had found other work.
* The Question: Do you approve of abolishing state employee hiring laws for the Illinois Gaming Board? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please. You might also want to chime in on Jaffe’s abolish CMS idea.
* Democrat Bill Foster won by about 17 points last year over longtime Republican Judy Biggert. This is uphill at best…
State Rep. Darlene Senger will meet with Republicans in Washington, D.C., this week in preparation to challenge Democratic Rep. Bill Foster next year.
Senger will sit down with staff at the National Republican Congressional Committee, as well as with House GOP leadership and U.S. Chamber of Commerce officials, according to a knowledgeable Illinois Republican.
She is also scheduled to speak with several Illinois members, including GOP Reps. Adam Kinzinger, Rodney Davis, Peter Roskam, Randy Hultgren and John Shimkus.
Republicans do not expect Senger will formally declare her candidacy until later this month. In early March, Senger told CQ Roll Call that she was “considering” the race.
“Part of what we’re looking at now is a trend in Illinois — [in] all of the non-presidential years, there is a way different race voter profile than there is during the presidential years,” Senger said on why she could outperform Biggert’s 2012 numbers.
Also, Senger or any other GOP challenger will not have to contend with the coattails of Illinois’ native son, President Barack Obama, in 2014 — or ever again.
But if Republicans make another poor showing here in 2014, it is hard to see how they will invest time and money in this district down the line. Also, Democrats point out that Foster outperformed Obama in the district in 2012.
Senger lives in Naperville, a suburb west of Chicago. She has served in Illinois House since 2009. Before her political career, she was a financial adviser. Her state committee assignments are related to finance.
* For perspective, Rod Blagojevich won this district 47-40, but Pat Quinn narrowly lost it 46-45. Mark Kirk won it 48-45. So, yeah, the numbers are very different in off years. But it’s still gonna be uphill for her as long as Foster does his job.
* This poll was embargoed until after midnight today, so I refused to post yesterday’s Sun-Times story until I got the actual results…
A new poll shows widespread support among Illinois voters across the political spectrum for the gun-control proposals being debated in Washington and Springfield.
By a 4-1 ratio, voters said they were more likely to elect legislative candidates who backed strong gun-control measures, according to the poll by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.
Those voters included gun owners, the poll found.
“It’s clear voters in Illinois are ready to reward candidates who support these limits — and punish candidates who don’t,” said pollster Al Quinlan, whose Washington-based firm does work for Mayor Rahm Emanuel.
OK, first of all, the poll was conducted for the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. So you gotta take the results with at least one grain of salt.
Secondly, these “more likely to vote” for or against a candidate results are often misconstrued by the media. The results are a gauge of how intense support or opposition really is. You need some pretty high numbers to indicate real electoral trouble or benefit, depending.
And, finally, the pollster surveyed 600 registered voters, not likely voters. That means we’re probably seeing a more liberal skew.
Thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014, are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a strong conceal and carry law with many of the proposals you just heard, or are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a weaker law with fewer restrictions, or would it make no difference?
Kind of a loaded question if you ask me. “Stronger” vs. “weaker”? C’mon.
Many of the provisions tested in the poll are actually in Rep. Brandon Phelps’ concealed carry bill, including bans on concealed carry in schools, stadiums, bars, and requiring training, permits and background checks.
The big difference between the two sides is one seeks a far broader ban, even near schools, for instance, while one would only ban it in school buildings.
But the poll did find that by 65-32, Illinoisans want concealed carry banned on buses and trains. That’s a very large margin. Rep. Phelps opposes that idea.
* When asked whether they favored or opposed allowing people to carry “concealed loaded guns” in public, we get this…
That’s a strong majority against, but not spectacularly so.
* Obviously, though, the public is opposed to most of the NRA’s agenda. By a 67-29 margin, they support a “ban on military style assault weapons.” 68 percent support and 28 percent oppose “limit ammunition magazines so only 10 rounds can be fired without
reloading.”
And some of these results are just off the charts.
For instance, by a whopping 93-6 they want “mandatory reporting to law enforcement when guns are lost or stolen.” And also by a huge 82-17 respondents say “All gun owners must register their guns and must notify the authorities when they sell or transfer their gun.”
After all those (and more) proposals are listed, half (300) of the respondents were asked…
Again, thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014, are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a strong gun law with many of the additional proposals you just heard, or are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a weaker law with fewer restrictions, or would it make no difference?
Again, thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014, are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a strong gun law that included background checks on all gun sales, or are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a gun law that did not include background checks on all gun sales, or would it make no difference?
* Billboards are some of the least effective political advertising, but they’re relatively cheap, so…
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is putting up billboards in 10 House Republicans’ districts accusing them of “putting radicalism and partisanship ahead of solutions for the middle class.” […]
The National Republican Congressional Committee fired back.
“The only thing that’s radical is the Democrats’ plan to never, ever balance our nation’s budget – and that’s causing a lot more whiplash for voters than these silly billboards will,” NRCC spokesman Daniel Scarpinato said.
“Every day when these Members’ constituents drive home, they think of how they will pay their bills, support their families, and pay for their healthcare and retirement – and now they will be reminded that their Republican Member of Congress would rather put radical ideology ahead of solutions for those worries,” said Emily Bittner of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “The Republican budget puts millionaires ahead of the middle class and partisanship before solutions, and now Republicans will not be able to hide from their radical records, because they are in plain view. Instead of offering bipartisan solutions, these House Republicans have chosen partisanship again.”
The Davis billboard…
Yeah, that’ll work, I’m sure.
* While the DCCC is blowing cash on a billboard, Davis raked in a pretty darned big haul…
Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill., raised just north of $401,000 in his first full fundraising quarter in Congress, according to figures provided exclusively to CQ Roll Call.
The freshman will report having $334,000 in cash on hand and zero debt at the end of March, which marks the deadline to close the books on the first fundraising period of the year. […]
House Democrats have actively searched for potential candidates in the 13th District, even feting a well-known circuit court judge in Washington, D.C., over inauguration weekend.
But so far, not a single Democrat has announced a bid to challenge Davis. Other potential candidates who previously indicated interest in the race include Champaign Mayor Don Gerard and former Champaign County Board Member Brendan McGinty.
I highly doubt they’ll find a solid candidate there. Davis is everywhere, and that district is far more Republican in the off-years than during presidential years, partly because the district is packed with universities. If they couldn’t beat him last year, it’s gonna be a lot tougher to win that seat in 2014.
* During his State of the State address in February, Gov. Pat Quinn said he was in favor of SB1, which at that time was a hybrid pension reform plan that included the Nekritz/Cross language and Senate President John Cullerton’s likely more constitutional reforms…
President Cullerton, thank you for recognizing this, and thank you for your leadership in providing us a path forward through Senate Bill 1, a comprehensive bill that stabilizes our pension systems and fixes the problem.
And thank you, Leader Tom Cross and Representative Elaine Nekritz for working together on a bi-partisan basis to make sure that pension reform is Job One for this General Assembly.
I urge all of you to be part of the solution. And while refinements may come, Senate Bill 1 is the best vehicle to get the job done. [Emphasis added.]
This was something like the third pension bill that Quinn had supported.
* Then, during his budget address last month, Gov. Quinn dropped his explicit support for SB1 and laid out several “fundamental elements” which he said “should be part of pension reform”…
First, there must be a firm guarantee that the State of Illinois will pay its full pension amount every year. I’ve done that since I’ve been governor.
But that did not happen under previous governors and legislatures. They shorted the pension fund and shirked their responsibility. That’s why we have a pension crisis today.
As you know, to make up for that failure, we’ve had to issue two pension obligation notes under my administration. The debt service on these notes will expire in 2020.
Once those notes expire, all of that revenue – nearly $1 billion annually – should be dedicated to the unfunded pension liability.
In addition, employees should adjust their own contributions to their pensions.
A few weeks ago, I attended the summit called by representatives of public employees. I listened to them.
I was pleased that they volunteered to raise their employee contribution to help resolve the pension crisis. This offer should be part of the solution.
Quinn endorsed the approach to reforming the underfunded state pensions that has gained the most traction. The House approved separate bills that would rein in cost-of-living adjustments, raise the retirement age and limit how salary could counted toward a retirement check — elements that Quinn wants senators to support in a final pension package.
Trouble is, those bills don’t include Quinn’s “fundamental elements” like guaranteed pension payments, using proceeds from pension bonds for pension payments when the bonds are retired and higher employee contributions.
* The governor’s full remarks…
I respect all of the legislators. I was so happy to see the House come together in a bi-partisan way. They had 25 Republicans, 41 Democrats, vote for a very comprehensive bill - and that’s really good.
I hope this passes the house very quickly. We need to do pensions sooner rather than later. This should not be happening at the last minute. Let’s get it done right away. I’m anxious to get a bill on my desk. In the senate I noticed there were about 23 votes for the House bill. When it comes back over, we only need seven more and I really look forward to working with Senate Democrats to get that extra seven votes to get to 30 to get the job done for the taxpayers of Illinois and the people of our state.
Pension reform is Job 1 this year and everybody has a little different idea. We’re not all going to get every single thing we want.
But let’s get something on my desk that I can sign into law for the people.”
So in just two months he’s gone from insisting on a comprehensive reform that tries to cover all bases, to demanding that “fundamental elements” be included in a pension bill, to yesterday’s “let’s get something on my desk.”
Also, he’s mistaken about that Senate vote. They had a roll call on the much more comprehensive Nekrtiz/Cross bill, not those three individual House bills.
* Amanda Vinicky at WUIS reports on a Springfield meeting last night between possible Republican candidate Bruce Rauner and some House Republicans…
One representative who attended the evening meeting, but who asked to remain unidentified, says Rauner said that because he’s not a career politician he’ll say, and do, whatever he wants. The lawmaker says Rauner compared his business background to Republicans’ last Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney. The legislator says Rauner told lawmakers that unlike Romney, he wouldn’t be afraid to upset anyone.
The source says Rauner did not specify how much of his own fortune he’d be willing to put into a race.
Another legislator says the meeting did not go well, and that Rauner is clearly not “ready for big time.” That lawmaker says Rauner threw House Republican Leader Tom Cross “under the bus” by insulting his plan to reduce the state’s pension costs.
Comparing your business background to Mitt Romney is prolly not the greatest idea. There’s already a very effective “defeat Romney” template in place, created by President Obama’s campaign, and it heavily involved whacking the candidate’s business dealings. And Romney did upset quite a few people with his infamous “47 percent” remark. If Rauner plans to go even further, he needs to remember that this ain’t exactly a GOP state.
* The Tom Cross stuff shows that Rauner clearly doesn’t want a negotiated solution to the pension debacle. He has high hopes that a 401(k) program can be somehow passed into law. Plus, dissing a caucus leader to that leader’s own members might not be a great idea, even if Cross does appear to be supporting Aaron Schock’s gubernatorial ambitions.
* I also sat down with a Rauner staffer last night. We had a pleasant evening, but we didn’t get to talk much because there were so many people around that I kept being diverted into other conversations.
The one thing I tried to make clear to him was that there’s nothing personal about Rauner’s coverage here. Rauner is getting more coverage here than others simply because he’s out there talking to folks about his campaign and raising lots of cash. Some candidates (the governor included) get all whiny about their coverage, but so far the Rauner people have stayed pretty professional in their responses. I appreciate that a lot. So, keep that in mind when commenting, please.
Thursday, Apr 11, 2013 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
If passed, the Natural Gas Modernization, Public Safety and Jobs Bill (SB 1665/HB 2414) will:
• Provide Illinoisans with a more reliable, modern natural gas distribution system and reduce the adverse effects of pipe failures or gas leaks;
• Save customers money through new efficiencies in system operations and maintenance, including a reduction in repair costs and the need for repeat visits;
• Protect over 1,000 Illinois jobs;
• Boost our economy. Peoples Gas’ modernization program is expected to directly invest approximately $2.5 billion into the economy over ten years, which is anticipated to generate an additional $3.7 billion into the Illinois economy; and,
• Deliver environmental benefits to Illinois through a reduced release of greenhouse gas emissions. By upgrading and replacing around 1,000 miles of mains, Peoples Gas will reduce methane emissions by the equivalent of about 96,250 metric tons of CO2e, which is comparable to taking around 19,000 cars off the road, once the project is completed.
Illinois needs to invest in our natural gas infrastructure, but our state needs to enact a sound regulatory framework that gives utilities the certainty to invest.
* I just received an e-mail from a tobacco company exec about a meeting this week of the Illinois Consumer Protection Committee. It’s a subject matter hearing on “Tobacco Harm Reduction.” The exec explained the phrase this way…
At its core, tobacco harm reduction recognizes ways in which smokers can reduce their health risks from cigarettes without quitting tobacco products altogether.
While no tobacco product has been shown to be safe and without risks, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco believes significant reductions in the harm associated with the use of cigarettes can be achieved by providing accurate information regarding the comparative risks of tobacco products to adult tobacco consumers, thereby encouraging smokers to migrate to the use of smoke-free tobacco and nicotine products.
We believe adult tobacco consumers have a right to be fully and accurately informed about the risks of serious diseases, the significant differences in the comparative risks of different tobacco and nicotine-based products, and the benefits of quitting. This information should be based on sound science.
* Indiana took a look at this and the American Lung Association was opposed. From the ALA’s website…
Tobacco Harm Reduction strategies are being promoted by tobacco companies like RJ Reynolds one of the nation’s leading purveyors of cigarettes and other tobacco products to bolster sales of their smokeless products by marketing them as “safer” alternatives to smoking. According to Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, tobacco companies spend $10.5 billion annually marketing tobacco products. In Indiana alone, $307.5 million was spent. The tobacco industry has tripled smokeless tobacco advertising and promotion from 1996-2006.
The State of Indiana and our elected officials should be in the position of deterring the use of ALL tobacco products and NOT be in the business of condoning any sort of tobacco use. State and local governments can reduce tobacco use, save lives and save money by implementing effective, proven solutions to the problem. These include higher tobacco taxes, strong smoke-free laws that apply to all workplaces and public places, and well-funded, sustained tobacco prevention and cessation programs.
There are those who believe the tobacco industry is using this campaign to promote the use of e-cigarettes and get kids starting to smoke…
In 2012, the e-cigarette brand Blu was purchased by Lorillard Tobacco Company and started airing television commercials featuring celebrities using e-cigarettes. The limited published research about the safety, efficacy, or public health impact of e-cigarettes raises concerns about the product’s lack of regulation, safety/quality assurances, and its appeal to youth or nonsmokers
* The Question: Should the Illinois House be holding this hearing? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
Illinois legislators will hear public testimony, April 11 at 8:30 a.m. on new tobacco products the industry is deceivingly promoting as “reduced risk” or “reduced harm”.
In advance of this hearing, Heather Eagleton, Illinois Director of Public Policy and Government Relations for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN) released the following statement:
“This is the latest effort by the tobacco industry to confuse and mislead the public about the dangers and addictive nature of tobacco products. This is a new twist on the old tobacco marketing campaigns of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s that falsely promised health benefits to be derived from filtered, “light”, and “less tar” tobacco product alternatives that were “more safe” versus “less safe.” These “harm reduction” messages were false then and are false now.
“The tobacco industry has marketed this new generation of smokeless tobacco products as a temporary way to deal with increasing cigarette taxes and smoke-free policies in public places. Despite the risks, these products, which include snus and dissolvables such as strips, orbs, and sticks, are being promoted by the tobacco industry as less harmful, more convenient, and more socially acceptable alternatives to traditional cigarettes. There is no scientific evidence that these products are safe, may be considered a safe substitute for, or are an effective means of quitting tobacco use.
“There is research, however, to show these products cause cancer of the mouth, pancreas and esophagus, as well as other serious health conditions.
“So long as tobacco products continue to be responsible for nearly one out of every five deaths in America today, tobacco product manufacturers cannot pose as being the solution.
“The FDA – not tobacco companies – should remain the final arbiter of what tobacco cessation therapies are proven to be truly safe and effective. Any claims of modified risk or reduced harm must be substantiated by extensive, long-term research that shows health benefits, and no hidden side effects, not just for certain individuals, but also for entire populations at large.
The presidents and chancellors of the 14 public universities in Illinois have unanimously endorsed a six-point proposal for addressing the state’s pension funding crisis as it relates to the State Universities Retirement System (SURS), and in a letter to the governor and legislative leaders they called it “a thoughtful and responsible approach.”
“We write to inform you of our unanimous endorsement of the reform proposal recently published by the Institute of Government and Public Affairs (IGPA) of the University of Illinois entitled, ‘Six Simple Steps: Reforming the Illinois State University Retirement System.’ We believe that, as a package, the steps outlined in this proposal represent a viable path forward for reforming the SURS pension plan,” the university chiefs stated. “Compared to other options, it represents the most desirable long-term solution.”
The individual steps outlined in detail in the IGPA paper (http://igpa.uillinois.edu/node/1753), which is part of the institute’s ongoing contribution to the pension funding dialogue, would do the following:
· Change the annual cost of living adjustment (COLA) to link it to the consumer price index
· Change the value of the Effective Rate of Interest to eliminate a so-called “hidden subsidy”
· Shift pension contributions by the state to colleges and universities in a gradual transition
· Increase employee contributions by an additional 2 percent
· Require the state to amortize the current SURS unfunded liability
· Provide a new “hybrid” defined-benefit/defined-contribution plan for new employees
The letter (http://go.my.illinois.edu/pensionletter) to Gov. Pat Quinn and the four legislative leaders, Democrat House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, and Republican House Leader Tom Cross and Senate Leader Christine Radogno, was sent by the university presidents and chancellors on April 4. The General Assembly returns this week from its spring recess and faces a May 31 deadline for adjournment.
“Our goal has been to identify potential reforms that are financially prudent and consistent with principles of constitutionality, fairness, and equity,” the letter stated. It acknowledged the additional financial burdens to be borne by the universities and their employees through the cost shift and COLA adjustment.
“The cost shift will be feasible only if phased in slowly, as recommended in the (IGPA) paper, and made concurrent with a stabilization of general revenue appropriations during the transition,” the letter stated. “We also realize that linking cost of living adjustment to the CPI will reduce retiree earnings in the short term. But this change also provides long-term insurance against high inflation, a valuable benefit for participants.”
In closing, the presidents and chancellors reiterated their continued collective interest in “working with you and others in the General Assembly to translate these ideas into legislation.”
Linking COLAs to actual cost of living increases would obviously be quite costly during periods of high inflation. But here’s how it would work…
The retirement annuity of current and future retirees will increase annually by one-half of the unadjusted percentage increase (but not less than zero) in the consumer price index-u in the previous twelve months, compounded upon the preceding year’s annuity.
* For the record, I don’t completely approve of dogs riding in the front seat, but how is this photo of Oscar the puppy not the cutest thing ever?…
And yes, I am a bit obsessed with that dog. I love Oscar, even though he had a little accident on the hardwood floor this morning. Puppies will be puppies, but he’s now got a firm date with training school.
Wednesday, Apr 10, 2013 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Creating the energy infrastructure of tomorrow is putting thousands of Illinoisans to work today in good-paying jobs. In a filing ComEd submitted with the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) on April 1, the utility announced that work under the 2011 Smart Grid law created more than 2,400 full-time equivalent jobs in Illinois in 2012.
These include 785 direct and contractor full-time equivalent jobs, including positions at the utility and outside contractors, representing a broad range of functions required to build a 21st century electric grid, from construction, engineering and system design to administration. The utility’s $165 million in capital spending on grid modernization projects in 2012 created an estimated 1,700 induced jobs. The ripple effect has been especially strong in the Chicago area and provides benefits beyond the direct spend. ComEd’s work is also improving electric reliability, which supports business growth and development in our state.
However, as a result of the ICC’s interpretation of the Smart Grid law, ComEd has had to postpone deployment of additional job-creating initiatives, including the installation of smart meters, until 2015, unless key funding issues are resolved.
To continue creating jobs, ComEd needs to restore funding to its grid modernization program. Senate Bill 9, which awaits Governor Quinn’s signature, will address this issue and get grid modernization back on track.
* Apparently, the only people surprised by Robin Kelly’s huge win yesterday were those on the far right…
Although he lost a hard fought campaign to anti-gun, anti-Tea Party extremist Robin Kelly on Tuesday night, Republican Paul McKinley had a more than respectable showing in a race that was deemed a no contest for the Democrat Party by the Chicago Media months before the primary election.
In the heavily Democrat district, McKinley received 17,994 votes, 22 percent overall with 98.5 percent of precincts reporting, after running a campaign with less $13,000 and zero support from the Illinois or National Republican Party (RNC).
Despite a full-on assault from local media outlets, led by the Chicago Tribune’s Bill Ruthhart and Fox Chicago’s Mike Flannery, McKinley also won two out of the three counties in the second district—taking Will County 43 to 41 percent and smashed her by 10 points in Kankakee County, 50 percent to Kelly’s 40.
Sorry, but 22 percent is a thorough thumping.
And just for a bit of recent historical perspective, Republican Brian Woodworth got 23 percent against Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. last November. And Woodworth also won Kankakee and Will counties. However, both McKinley and Woodworth outperformed Mitt Romney, who got 18.5 percent last November.
Counties don’t vote. People do. McKinley never had a chance, except in the fevered imaginations of hyper-partisans.
Political newcomer Jason Ashmore unseated longtime Sesser Mayor Ned Mitchell in a hotly contested race Tuesday.
Ashmore, 36, won by a vote of 713 over the 448 cast for Mitchell, mayor of the Franklin County city since 1979.
Voter turnout was high with an estimated 75 to 80 percent of registered voters casting ballots.
“I want to thank Mayor Mitchell for his service to the city, and I want to thank the voters of Sesser for the confidence they placed in me,” Ashmore said. “I promise I will not violate that trust.”
Mitchell once served in the Illinois Senate. He is also a huge Grateful Dead fan. Yeah, I know. I was surprised to hear that as well.
Jesse White’s chief of staff Tom Benigno lost his bid for Norridge Village President Tuesday night.
With all 10 precincts reporting, James Chmura of the Norridge Improvement Party had 53 percent of the vote to Benigno’s 39 percent. A third candidate, Riccardo Mora had about 7 percent of vote. In all, 3,603 votes were cast in the Cook County suburb.
Casey Urlacher, brother of former Chicago Bear Brian Urlacher, was elected mayor of the small town of Mettawa, in Lake County, in his first run for public office. Urlacher earned 61 percent of the vote. His challenger, Jeffrey Clark, earned 39 percent.
Former Chicago Bears defensive lineman Steve McMichael lost his bid unseat the mayor of southwest suburban Romeoville. With all precincts reporting, incumbent Mayor John Noak received nearly 61 percent of the vote and McMichael received about 39 percent of the vote.
“I am honored that the people of Romeoville have placed their trust in me and our entire Romeoville United team for another four years,” Noak said in a victory statement.
Mother Wendy Casey and her son Randall Casey were both defeated in the race for Dixmoor village president by village trustee Dorothy Armstrong. Wendy Casey and Randall Casey each earned less than 10 percent of the 515 votes cast.
Also, my former intern Mike Murray lost his Schaumburg trustee race. Must’ve been that milk carton.
Wednesday, Apr 10, 2013 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
The satellite television industry serves a crucial role in connecting Illinois to the rest of the world with content that informs, entertains and educates – in many instances it’s the exclusive broadcast service provider available to Illinois homes. In addition, the satellite TV industry is an important economic driver creating hundreds of jobs in our state.
Facts About Satellite TV in Illinois:
• Serves 1.3 million households in Illinois (almost a third of homes that subscribe choose satellite)
• Employs over 790 people, plus more than 1,000 technicians at 481 local retailers
• Rural Illinois depends on satellite TV since cable does not often provide service to their area
• Satellite TV offers a wider range of foreign language programming in comparison to cable
Lawmakers continue to be prodded by the cable TV industry to place a NEW 5% monthly tax on satellite TV service. Previous versions of this discriminatory tax proposal have been defeated in Springfield—and similar bills are regularly defeated in other states including three times in neighboring Indiana, Iowa and Minnesota. This revenue generator needs to be clearly labeled what it is: An unfair tax increase on the 1.3 million Illinois families and businesses who subscribe to satellite TV.
Though Lang’s bill, House Bill 1, is just a few votes shy of approval, he said there’s still 10 to 12 undecided lawmakers with whom he continues to have discussions.
“When you have a controversial bill like this, sometimes it’s a moving target,” Lang said of the votes needed for passage. “There will be people who are leaning ‘yes,’ and the next day, maybe not so much. And some that were leaning ‘no’ are with you the next day.”
* From the list I’ve seen, just about every freshman target is off the bill, so I’m not buying this “I’m thinking about it” schtick…
Rep. Sue Scherer, D-Decatur, said Tuesday she’s still undecided.
“This is one where I feel it’s kind of a social issue, so I don’t think my own personal opinion (is a factor). I’m not voting just on who I am. I’m voting for my constituents,” Scherer said. “I’m just trying to keep my ears open.”
She’s listening mainly to House Democratic staff, who are telling targets to vote “No.”
For four years now, State Representative Lou Lang has made it his mission to get medical marijuana passed in the state of Illinois, but with no success.
On Tuesday, he again asked lawmakers to pass medical marijuana for the ones who need it most, the patients.
“Nineteen other states permit the use of medical marijuana, some of these states have it done it real well,” Lang said to the media inside the Capitol Rotunda.
Skokie State Representative Lou Lang wants Illinois to become number twenty, and he said they will do it the right way.
“This is an opportunity without any cost to the taxpayers at all to allow people who need a product to get it,” added Lang.
Jim Champion, an Army veteran from Somonauk who was diagnosed 25 years ago with multiple sclerosis, said before he started smoking marijuana, he took 54 prescription pills a day, including morphine and Valium, yet still suffered muscle spasms.
He started smoking marijuana and has been able to reduce his prescription drugs to 24 pills a day.
Paul Bachmann, a Plano resident diagnosed with multiple sclerosis six years ago, said even after taking several strong narcotics, Bachmann could not ease the pain and crippling muscle spasms that kept him up at night — until he tried medical marijuana.
Kali McCauley of Orland Hills was 13 when she was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease, an autoimmune disease that causes internal bleeding, nausea, diarrhea and vomiting. Now 22, she said she has run out of medications to try, but marijuana eases some of her symptoms.
Jessica Bauer, a 27-year-old from Rockford with terminal pancreatic cancer, said smoking marijuana helped her regain weight and enough energy to play with her 5-year-old daughter.
And they’re all criminals under Illinois state law and could go to prison for what they’re doing.
* Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Chicago George J. Rassas headquarters in Libertyville, and his flock is within Rep. Ed Sullivan’s district. As you already know, Sullivan (R-Mundelein) has announced that he will vote for the gay marriage bill. Bishop Rassas issued a statement in response…
I was distressed and disappointed to read of Representative Ed Sullivan’s change of heart concerning the legislative effort in Springfield to redefine marriage. Representative Sullivan had indicated for some time that he understood the gravity of this issue and was prepared to oppose Senate Bill 10.
Senate Bill 10 proposes to legally alter an institution that has been the bedrock of human society for much longer than our state has been in existence. This bill would declare that gender and gender differences play no unique role in marriage and the family and thereby undermine the norms that have defined marriage (i.e. gender, procreation) throughout human history and that are essential for healthy families and the common good of society.
Representative Sullivan mistakenly claims that Senate Bill 10 contains strong religious freedom protections. In fact, the bill allows only meager protections for what happens within the walls of select religious facilities. It offers very limited protections to religiously affiliated nonprofits, which are extensions of religious missions, or to individual conscience – the right of any man or woman to live by their own religious beliefs in every avenue of life. Every state that has redefined marriage by legislation has offered greater religious liberty protections than does Senate Bill 10.
There can be no doubt that this issue of marriage and sexuality are controversial and sensitive. We must be careful to respect all of our neighbors and ensure that none are being unjustly discriminated against. However, that safeguard does not rationalize the redefinition of marriage and the family. It is simply wrong to say otherwise.
The first rule when negotiating legislation is to agree to not oppose the bill in the end. So, the Catholic Conference is basically forcing proponents to negotiate against themselves.
But as far as the Bishop’s statement about the bill offering only “meager protections” for what happens within church walls, here is the bill’s actual language…
That’s pretty strong stuff.
And what about how Illinois’ religious protections are supposedly weaker than every other state’s laws? Well, here is the relevant language in Illinois’ proposal…
There are some very real protections in that bill, including for groups “whose principal purpose is the study, practice, or advancement of religion.”
New York’s gay marriage law may make the protections a bit clearer…
But even with those protections, there was still a hue and cry from Catholic bishops…
The New York State Catholic Conference, led by Archbishop Timothy Dolan, stated to NBC News that it was “deeply disappointed and troubled” and that it will “alter radically and forever humanity’s historic understanding of marriage.
Sullivan, who is Catholic, told us yesterday that he knew political blow-back was coming. After all, Illinois GOP Chair Pat Brady of St. Charles has faced possible ouster over taking the same stance.
* “This is the thing that keeps me awake at night,” Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services Director Julie Hamos told Crain’s. What’s keeping her awake? The lack of doctors in the Medicaid program ahead of a big expansion…
Many physicians have historically shunned the program, in part because of its low fees. Roughly 16 percent of the state’s 47,000 doctors aren’t even signed up for Medicaid. Even among those who are, the overwhelming majority infrequently see patients, leaving the care concentrated in the hands of a few, according to a Crain’s analysis of payment records published last year. […]
While the influx of patients likely won’t be disruptive across the country, the shortage will be felt in areas with a large number of uninsured and few doctors to begin with, said Dr. Huang, director of the Center for Translational and Policy Research of Chronic Diseases at the University of Chicago.
* HFS has temporarily increased reimbursement rates, but that may not be enough…
Board-certified pediatricians, internists and family medicine practitioners are among those eligible for the higher fees, according to a March 4 notice published by the Department of Healthcare and Family Services. Physicians who aren’t certified in those specialties are also eligible if at least 60 percent of their annual billings are to Medicaid.
The temporary rate change makes Medicaid reimbursements equal to the higher fees paid by Medicare for about 180 billing codes for primary care services, such as vaccinations and check-ups, said Dr. Arvind Goyal, medical director for the HFS division of medical programs. Rates vary per service, and the increase only covers services rendered from Jan. 1 through Dec. 31, 2014, when the higher rate is set to expire.
“I am not excited about this at all,” Quinn said about implementing concealed carry. “If this has to happen, it has to have the proper restrictions and limitations. … I think we should make sure it’s very tight and I think local communities, wherever they are, should have the option to make it as tight as possible in their community.”
The NRA’s Vandermyde predicted he could pass a bill to block Chicago, Cook County and bigger cities from enacting tighter restrictions than a statewide law. That would take 71 votes in the House, and a test run came close, garnering 67 votes.
Phelps said the practical reason to have a statewide set of concealed carry rules is so law-abiding gun owners can drive across Illinois without accidentally violating the laws of different communities while passing through.
House Majority Leader Currie, the longtime voice of the General Assembly’s anti-gun movement, doubted the House would give the NRA-backed legislation 71 votes — the expected requirement of a three-fifths majority needed for a statewide ban to supersede the home-rule powers of Chicago and other local governments.
“May” vs. “Shall” issue is one of the most important items on the agenda right now, to say the least. The NRA is adamant about a statewide standard. Democrats like Quinn are just as adamantly on the other side.
I wouldn’t make any definite plans for June just yet if I were you. There could be a veto if the GA and the governor wind up on opposing sides.
* Meanwhile, the Illinois State Rifle Association is still ginning up the troops…
URGENT ALERT – YOUR IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED
CHICAGO MACHINE MISREPRESENTS ISRA POSITION ON GUN CONTROL
The liars in Chicago City Hall are at it again. This time they are spreading misinformation claiming that the ISRA supports a very dangerous gun control bill.
WE NEED YOU TO HELP SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT
Anti-gun crackpot Rep. Michael Zalewski recently introduced HB 2265. This gun control bill would set mandatory 3-year jail terms for violating any gun control law. For example, forget to renew your FOID and you go to jail for 3 years. On the other hand, if you boost a liquor store with a knife, you might get a 6-month suspended sentence. You know what this is all about. You know this isn’t about crime – it’s about punishing lawful gun owners.
THE CHICAGO MACHINE IS LYING TO REPRESENTATIVES CLAIMING THAT THE ISRA SUPPORTS ZALEWSKI’S DRACONIAN GUN CONTROL BILL. THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE LIE. THE ISRA STEADFASTLY OPPOSES HB2265.
HERE IS WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO RIGHT THIS WRONG:
1. Call your State Representative. Politely tell the person who answers the phone that you are a law-abiding Illinois firearm owner and that you oppose HB2265. Tell them that you expect the Representative to vote “NO” on HB2265. Also tell the person that anyone who claims that the ISRA supports HB2265 is a liar. If you do not know who your state representative is, the Illinois State Board of Elections has a new interactive search page here:
www.elections.state.il.us/DistrictLocator/DistrictOfficialSearchByAddress.aspx
If you know who your representative is, you can find their contact info here:
www.ilga.gov/house/.
2. Pass this alert on to your family and gun owning friends. Tell them to take action immediately.
3. Post this alert to any and all Internet Bulletin Boards or Blogs to which you belong.
REMEMBER – GUN CONTROL IS A DISEASE, YOU ARE THE CURE!
Zalewski is definitely an agressive gun control legislator. But a “crackpot”? Not.
* Illinois State University is looking for a new president, and some are wondering if it’s a coincidence that Gov. Pat Quinn is now tinkering with ISU’s board of trustees…
Gov. Pat Quinn has taken steps to boot at least one Republican — and possibly a second — off the governing board at Illinois State University just weeks after triggering a political slugfest over Southern Illinois University trustees.
On Monday, the Democrat from Chicago nominated Barlett resident Bob Churney to replace Bloomington businessman Bob Dobski on the ISU board. The terms of Dobski and Joanne Maitland, the longest-serving trustee, officially ended in January.
Under a state law that took effect last year, their positions became vacant when Quinn took no action within 60 days of their term’s expiration. There was no indication Monday whether Maitland will be reappointed.
Joanne Maitland is former Sen. John Maitland’s wife. Not a good move by the governor. Quinn’s spokesman totally denies any ulterior motives, but…
State Sen. Bill Brady, R-Bloomington, called the situation unfortunate and disappointing.
“I’m appalled at the fact he would do this and I’m appalled at how he’s done this,” said Brady, Quinn’s opponent in the 2010 gubernatorial battle. “It’s disappointing. I couldn’t thank Bob Dobski and Joanne Maitland more for their service to their ISU board.”
If he used half the energy he’s expended on university boards and applied it to something positive at the Statehouse, the governor might actually be able to get something done in the General Assembly.
* Meanwhile, the plaintiffs and the state have both asked the Illinois Supreme Court to hear a direct appeal of a county judge’s ruling on the constitutionality of cutting government health insurance benefits…
Illinois officials have agreed to ask the state Supreme Court to directly hear the appeal of cases challenging the state’s authority to begin charging retirees premiums for their state-subsidized health insurance.
If the Supreme Court agrees, it will lead to a quicker resolution of whether the state can begin charging the premiums.
Last month, Sangamon County Judge Steven Nardulli ruled that state-subsidized health insurance for retirees is not a pension benefit protected by the state Constitution. He dismissed four lawsuits that were filed seeking to stop the state from imposing insurance premiums on retirees.
Springfield attorneys Don Craven and John Myers, who filed one of the lawsuits, appealed the decision to the 4th District Appellate Court. However, they also filed a request to the Supreme Court to hear the appeal directly, bypassing the appellate court. Craven said Monday the case was likely going to end up with the Supreme Court at some point anyway.
The FY 14 certified contribution appropriation for the five retirement systems is a combined $6.8 billion. This is an increase of $965 million, or 16.4% compared to the current fiscal year. Under current law, estimated payments in fiscal years
2015 and 2016 are $7.0 billion and $7.2 billion, respectively. The FY 15 estimated payment is an increase of $200 million, or 3% over FY 14. The increase in FY 16 is an additional $204.7 million (3%).
The future amounts aren’t as huge as they have been, but that’s still a lot of cash.
* Roundup…
* Cahokia looking at teacher, athletics cuts: A southwestern Illinois school district is blaming cuts in state funding for its tentative plan to eliminate dozens of teaching jobs and go next school year without an athletics director, coaches or extracurricular activities.
* New name emerges in Illinois Treasurer race: Carter describes himself as a “conservative media pundit and entrepreneur” who was raised in Chicago, went abroad and returned.
* Jackson Successor, Former Bear McMichael, Urlacher Brother On Ballot Today
The exact cost of HB 2762 is impossible to determine. Additional students means the cost of General State Aid will increase. However, the Illinois State Board of Education is unsure of the exact number of students who will be impacted by lowering the compulsory attendance age from 7 to 6, nor does the ISBE know which districts will see an increase in the number of students as a result of this legislation or if those children will be low-income students, which increases the cost of the poverty claim for the district.
* The Question: Should the compulsory school age be lowered from 7 to 6? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
A memorial service for Dawn Clark Netsch, professor of law emerita, will be held at 2 p.m. Saturday, April 13 in Thorne Auditorium, Northwestern University School of Law, 375 E. Chicago Ave., in Chicago. The service is open to the public. A reception will be held in the Atrium immediately following the service.
Donation info is here. Northwestern has set up a “guest book” here.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel had some big shoes to fill when he took over for Mayor Richard M. Daley when he was inaugurated as mayor in May 2011. But according to a study released by the University of Illinois-Chicago, the City Council has been more compliant with Rahm in his first two years than they were with Richard J. Daley during his first two years in office and more than Richard M. Daley had in his final two years in office. Dick Simpson, a political science professor at UIC and a former alderman (44th ward, 1971-1979), headed the study which looked at “30 divided roll call votes since the current City Council began in May, 2011.” (Grain of salt #1: even just one alderman dissenting is enough to categorize a vote as a “divided roll call.”)
Per a press release on the study: “According to the study, 21 aldermen voted to support Mayor Emanuel’s position 100% of the time and 18 aldermen voted with him over 90% of the time. Only seven of the 30 issues drew six or more dissenting votes.” The study follows up that the issue with the most dissent was Mayor Emanuel’s proposal to put cameras in “Children Safety Zones” around schools. That vote had 33 vote in favor and 14 dissent (three voted absent).
The study continues: “The average level of support for Mayor Emanuel was 93% on all divided roll call votes, an increase from the overwhelming 88% Richard M. Daley enjoyed in his last term. It was also greater than the 83% achieved by Richard J. Daley in his first two years in office, 1955-56, or the 85% support the ‘Boss’ received in 1971-72. Emanuel even topped Mayor Edward J. Kelly’s 88% support earned in 1939-40.”
Aldermen claim that they voted more often with the mayor because Mayor Emanuel was more willing to compromise with them than Mayor Daley had been. When aldermen pushed back on cuts to staff and library service hours in the 2012 budget battles, the mayor agreed to reduce the cuts. Or when the rules for NATO Summit protests were too draconian and aldermen objected, the mayor made the rules less restrictive. So some aldermen argue that they vote with the mayor more often because they are able to work out compromises behind the scenes.
Yet, in two years since the mayor and the city council were sworn in, there have been only 30 divided roll call votes. The number remains at about the same level as under Mayor Daley at about two a month. Historically, the number of divided roll call votes has ranged between 50-100 a year and peaked at 387 divided votes during Mayor Eugene Sawyer’s two years in office during the chaos that which followed Council Wars from 1987 – 1989.
* My former intern Mike Murray is running for Schaumburg Township trustee. The Schaumburg Township Republican Organization sent out a mailer with Mike’s photo on a milk carton…
Well, yeah. He’s not a trustee, so of course he isn’t in the public records.
Kind of a lame attack if you ask me. I mean, sheesh, the local GOP should’ve just called me if they wanted some opposition research.
Just kidding.
Mostly.
Also, they have his name as Mike Murray and Mike Murphy. Proofread much?
* The comments on GOP state Rep. Ed Sullivan’s Facebook page have been overwhelmingly positive since he announced he was voting for the gay marriage bill. But, there’s always one goofball in the bunch…
Notice that Mr. Badenorst “liked” his own comment. I don’t get why people do that.
Hyperpartisans make me ill. The guy is with you. Get over yourself.
Also, keep in mind that the entire nation is being moved to support gay rights as more gay people have come out of the closet. So, that commenter’s “logic” (which some national Democratic pundit types have also been using) isn’t just an indictment of Republicans, it’s an indictment of the majority of Americans.
With the Illinois state Legislature set to return from recess, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today reiterated its pledge to spend $250,000 defeating Republican legislators who vote in support of same-sex ‘marriage’ in Illinois, just like NOM successfully did in New York.
“Any Republican in Illinois who betrays the cause of marriage will be casting a career-ending vote and will be held accountable to their constituents,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “We will spend whatever it takes—hundreds of thousands of dollars if necessary—to remove them from office, just as we did three of the four turncoat Republican state Senators in New York who were responsible for gay ‘marriage’ passing there. We will not hesitate to support pro-family Democrats to replace them, as our record in New York proves.”
In New York, same-sex marriage narrowly passed the state senate after four Republicans and two Democrats changed their votes in response to promises of campaign cash from gay marriage activists. NOM targeted all seven for defeat, and was successful in removing five of them, replacing them in 2012 with pro-family Senators. As numerous media have reported, including the New York Times, three of the four Republicans were removed from office despite promises by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and gay-rights advocates to do everything in their power to protect them against political retribution. (”Costly Toll for Republicans Who Voted for Gay Marriage”).
In addition to supporting challengers to the four Republicans, NOM also supported pro-family Democrats, helping to re-elect Senator Ruben Diaz and electing a pro-marriage Democrat to unseat Senator Shirley Huntley in the Democratic primary. “Marriage is not a partisan issue,” Brown said. “We will stand with pro-family legislators regardless of party affiliation when they stand up for true marriage.”
I’ve asked NOM for a specific react to Rep. Sullivan’s announcement. Stay tuned.
* Coverage roundup…
* VIDEO: Illinois Republican lawmaker supports gay marriage
* National prognosticators are saying that Gov. Pat Quinn is favored to win reelection. From the New York Times’ FiveThirtyEight blog…
Although Mr. Quinn is the second most unpopular governor up for re-election in 2014, he is a Democrat in deep blue Illinois. If he runs, he is still considered a favorite to win re-election: the Cook Political Report, Sabato’s Crystal Ball and The Rothenberg Political Report rate the Illinois governor’s race, respectively, as leaning Democratic, likely Democratic and likely Democratic.
Despite Quinn’s terrible approval ratings, this is still a Democratic-leaning state. And 2014 doesn’t yet appear to be shaping up to be as horrible of a year for that party as 2010 was. So, those ratings are understandable.
Notice, however, that this is about a Democrat vs. a Republican. If Quinn is challenged in the primary, then all bets are off.
Tuesday, Apr 9, 2013 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
If passed, the Natural Gas Modernization, Public Safety and Jobs Bill (SB 1665/HB 2414) will:
• Provide Illinoisans with a more reliable, modern natural gas distribution system and reduce the adverse effects of pipe failures or gas leaks;
• Save customers money through new efficiencies in system operations and maintenance, including a reduction in repair costs and the need for repeat visits;
• Protect over 1,000 Illinois jobs;
• Boost our economy. Peoples Gas’ modernization program is expected to directly invest approximately $2.5 billion into the economy over ten years, which is anticipated to generate an additional $3.7 billion into the Illinois economy; and,
• Deliver environmental benefits to Illinois through a reduced release of greenhouse gas emissions. By upgrading and replacing around 1,000 miles of mains, Peoples Gas will reduce methane emissions by the equivalent of about 96,250 metric tons of CO2e, which is comparable to taking around 19,000 cars off the road, once the project is completed.
Illinois needs to invest in our natural gas infrastructure, but our state needs to enact a sound regulatory framework that gives utilities the certainty to invest.
